Browsing Category Home

Nicole and Tim thought they had the strongest marriage ever. They’d been married five years, no kids yet, and everything seemed so solid. But when their closest friends Laura and Daniel—their matron of honor and best man—announced their split, everything felt called into question. How could Daniel just start up a months-long affair with someone he’d found on Bumble? Dana wondered if even Tim could betray her.

No marriage is safe from peril in our pro-divorce culture. Three big magnets constantly tug spouses apart, and in moments of ennui, frustration or anger can pull them toward a Divorce Industry of counselors, lawyers and financial advisors seeking customers.

Once conscious of these destructive forces, you can be on your guard against them.

Divorce Magnet Number 1: Sympathy and Support for Divorce

When wedding vows were iron-clad commitments, divorce was a failure that brought “shaming” followed by long-term stigma. Mention you’re “going through a divorce” now, and you’ll collect comforting embraces and caring reassurance, in a striking cultural flip that took just a single generation.

In fact, you’ll get a lot more sympathy by splitting than by announcing that you’re working on problems in your marriage. Friends assume a divorce leaves you shattered and bereft, requiring their compassion, while working on your marriage implies you’re facing your demons, and the issues could be temporary.

If it’s you in a marital crisis, wouldn’t you choose commiseration and a warm embrace, when the alternative is a difficult process with an angry or hurt spouse? Friends think they’re helping by being “non-judgmental” about whether you should stay married, but their unconditional support makes divorce look like an equally legitimate choice. They think they’re empowering you by saying you shouldn’t take whatever it is that’s causing the rift, or by offering you a place to stay. Instead they’re making it easy to bolt, and placing you on the conveyor belt to a decree.

At work and with other obligations, divorcing is a convenient excuse for slacking, fudging on promises, and behaving badly. If you miss a deadline or take a long lunch, the assumption is you’re emotionally strained. With so many accommodations, divorcing when your marriage feels bad becomes a more attractive option.

Divorce Magnet Number 2: Sex is Everywhere (Except in Marriage)

When Paul called off the European vacation Brittany had planned down to the minute because his ex was in a major car accident, she felt less than loving. Not only because Paul put his ex first, but because he threw away the carefully orchestrated trip that was supposed to be the honeymoon they never had.

When you don’t like your spouse; when you’re angry or betrayed or verbally abused, sex in marriage is either completely selfish or manipulative. And when a couple perches on the verge of divorce, usually there’s no sex.

But intimacy is available everywhere else. Just the existence of the phone app Tinder and its many variants keeps non-marital sex and physicality a constant possibility. Business Insider reports that 12 percent of those using the app are in a relationship.

While apps furnish contact with a live person, pornography offers thrills without the bother of a close encounter. Most younger men routinely access porn–despite evidence that private viewing hurts relationships. A 2014 study by the Barna Group found that “eight out of ten men [in the general U.S. population] between the ages of 18 and 30 view pornography at least monthly.”

And “three out of ten men view pornography daily,” the study found, even though many realize it’s a problem. Asked if they’re addicted to porn, a third of younger men say yes or that they’re “unsure.”

Pornography undermines commitment to an existing relationship in both the short and long term, according to a series of five studies by Brigham Young University researchers. And the more porn the subjects consumed, especially men, the greater the magnetic pull out of the relationship.

Divorce Magnet Number 3: Workplace Priority and Proximity

“In college and grad school, the whole push was to succeed in my career,” Leslie, an engineer for a cloud-based software firm told me. “I was urged to take science and math, and told how to compete for jobs. Being a wife or mom full-time was dismissed as wasting my potential.”

The implication of “leaning in” is that maintaining a harmonious marriage and raising sane kids are nice accessories to real achievement, even though Sheryl Sandberg herself admitted in a UC Berkeley commencement speech a year after her husband died that her family meant more than career. No collegiate institution teaches students that their most worthwhile accomplishments are at home, even though plenty of academic research shows this.

For example, a 2012 study of twenty-five thousand graduates of Harvard Business School—whose education puts them in immediate demand for top-notch positions—found that over time, definitions of success shifted. “For me, at age twenty-five, ‘success’ meant career,” responded a woman in her forties. “Now I think of success much differently: Raising happy, productive children, contributing to the world around me, and pursuing work that is meaningful to me.” The researchers noted, “When we asked respondents to rate the importance of nine career and life dimensions, nearly 100%, regardless of gender, said that ‘quality of personal and family relationships’ was ‘very’ or ‘extremely’ important.”

If that’s the case, why do we celebrate professional success over the value of marriage? That difference encourages neglect of relationships and ultimately foments divorce.

Workers who devote a huge proportion of their waking hours to their jobs steal that time, and with it communication and concern, away from their families. Next comes emotional distance between spouses, a gulf exacerbated by the temptations of physical proximity to colleagues of the opposite sex.

Combine these vulnerabilities with a little casual fraternization, and the result becomes marital infidelity. A survey of 31,000 persons on “office sex and romance” commissioned by Elle Magazine found plenty of threats to monogamy:

92 percent of respondents said a co-worker they found attractive had flirted with them;

62 percent admitted at least one office affair (while 14 percent said they would never date someone from work);

42 percent were married or in a relationship at the time of an office affair;

41 percent had sex on the job, and 16 percent used a boss’s office. Seven percent got caught in the act, but 87 percent got away with no consequence.

With divorce magnets from friends and a pro-divorce culture, easy sex and porn, career demands and workplace chemistry, how can a marriage survive and thrive?

The first defense is to be open about your experiences and reactions. Talking about potential hazards, and deciding the behavior boundaries you’re comfortable with can deflect perils before they intrude. Vice President Pence was chided for his rule to avoid after-hours dinners with women alone, but since the #MeToo revelations, eschewing impropriety suddenly seems prudent. By increasing communication with your mate, and honoring policies you jointly decide, you can create a barrier around your relationship that allows it to remain strong. Read More →

Bride and Groom flash Duchenne smiles at this 1985 wedding as celebrants dance around them in a circle

My gosh, there’s a lot to put one in a crummy mood. The political scene is discouraging, the news tells of division, racial conflicts, war and corruption. Our own families provide the counterpoint, but everyone’s going a hundred ways. How do you keep things positive?

Start by shaping your own face.

Here’s an example. Walking down the hall at the gym, you see someone you don’t know coming toward you. There’s that awkward second when you wonder if you should make eye contact, ignore the person and keep going, or smile and say ‘hi’ as you pass. What’s your response?

If you chose to smile, you’re increasing your own chances for a pleasant workout, and in fact, a great day.

By now everyone’s familiar with the many studies that show smiling alone causes physiological reactions in the body, releasing dopamine, endorphins and serotonin that lift your mood and the moods of everyone who sees you, lower your heart rate and blood pressure, and act as natural pain relief. Other research shows myriad social benefits. Your smile makes others think you’re more attractive, and causes them to respond with a smile of their own. In the workplace, your smile makes others deem you more warm and approachable—and tilts customers toward greater satisfaction (though there’s conflicting data about whether your grin makes others think you more competent).

Merely moving your face into a big smile brings emotional and health perks, whether or not it’s sincere. In a clever University of Kansas study, subjects misled to think they were in a multi-tasking trial were measured for stress while holding chopsticks various ways in their teeth. With the sticks creating a wide smile, subjects had less stress while completing difficult tasks than when their mouths held neutral or less broadly-smiling poses. But even the less-wide smilers recovered from stressful tasks more quickly than subjects with unsmiling mouths.

This study shows that just the formation of a smile, even if it’s unrelated to genuinely happy emotions, has a positive impact. Forcing a smile against a person’s will—such as employees required to offer “service with a smile” even when annoyed—is less beneficial than when you embrace the act, other research shows. In our everyday lives, when we choose a happy countenance for whatever reason, we’ll reap several levels of reward.

This is particularly true in family life. When a couple is enduring a conflict, or a difficult situation that tests their relationship, they can mitigate a schism simply by consistently greeting the other with a smile. It’s a strategy for overcoming nearly every type of sourness. Even when tough situations require deeper resolution, you can build a partnership in tackling them by showing regard in this painless way.

Julie looks down at her phone and sees the incoming call is her husband. “Hey, it’s the sweetest guy in the universe!” she answers, rather than just saying “Hi, hon.” The smile implicit in her enthusiastic greeting sets the tone for the interchange, as Julie’s spouse instantly envisions her smiling face. As explained in my book Don’t Divorce: Powerful Arguments for Saving and Revitalizing Your Marriage (2017), if you’re feeling bored with your relationship, or irritated at something your mate has done, you can regain some positive feelings instantly just by raising your lips.

Do a “Duchenne”

But did you know that you can get the best reaction with one particular type of smile? Even a perfunctory grin improves any encounter, but the configuration formed by the zygomatic major and the orbicularis oculi muscles together, called the Duchenne smile, most effectively brings an uptick in joy. The French anatomist Guillaume Duchenne wrote in 1862 that the orbicularis oculi acts in response to “the sweet emotions of the soul,” involving the upper face, eyes crinkling while twinkling. His namesake grin was finally quantified in the 1970s by researchers at the University of California, San Francisco, who developed muscular coordinates for 3,000 facial expressions–allowing subsequent researchers to validate the power of the Duchenne smile.

Duchenne smiles in a college yearbook were found to predict life success

A 30-year longitudinal study found that women wearing Duchenne smiles in their college yearbook photos turned out to have greater marital satisfaction and overall well-being at age 52. A related study correlated low-intensity smiles in youth with later propensity to divorce. A third piece of research found that professional baseball players flashing Duchenne smiles in their 1952 yearbook were half as likely to die by 2006 as their more somber-looking cohort.

This type of smile conveys and creates its sincerity. If you truly want to engender happiness, do a Duchenne.

Being Jewish, I’m conscious of the mitzvah—commandment—called in Hebrew “sayver panim yafos.” Jews are instructed to greet others with a happy countenance, a directive thousands of years old that has meant greater odds for positive interactions.

Sometimes we eye someone and normally don’t think to smile. In our culture, old or infirm people tend to be marginalized. Children, too, are often disregarded. We’ve got an unconscious bias toward the potent and strong. One exercise I’ve found spiritually uplifting is to intentionally smile and look in the eyes of all whom I encounter—especially if it means facing downward toward a wheelchair. Each person is worthy and valuable, and our power to enhance their moments—while adding to our own—is as close as a smile.

Kathryn Jean Lopez of National Review asked me to respond to some questions about my book Don’t Divorce, which they published as “Resisting the Divorce Momentum.” However, they trimmed the piece for space, and I thought I’d post the interview in its entirety, which includes some extra nuggets.

You wrote one book warning against divorce only to be excoriated. Wouldn’t you try something else this time? Raindrops on roses or puppies – or any kind of dog (people seem to love dog books!)?

Though I love dogs, I don’t really have much to offer about them, I’m afraid. I did write books on other topics since The Case Against Divorce which came out—I hesitate to reveal my age here—24 years ago. That title is still in print and selling, and over the years I continue to receive article requests and speaking invitations on the topic.

But just as marriage has changed drastically since that book, divorce has also transformed, and simply discussing the downside of divorce is no longer enough. At this point, we’re seeing the damage parental divorce has wreaked on now-adult children, who refrain from marriage (pushing the mean age at first marriage up to 29 for men) lest they endure or cause for their children the heart-wrenching divorce experience. I started to observe the underlying values changes that demolished divorce stigma and lets people put their desires and emotions ahead of their commitments, and that was the clincher—it was time to broaden the discussion and revisit the topic.

Why do you “confess” your own divorce early on?

I’m embarrassed and sad about my early marriage ending in divorce, so my strong initial inclination was just to leave it out. After all, I’ve been married to my husband Michael for 32 years. But the truth is that one can never live down nor forget a marriage, even if it’s without children (as mine was), a phenomenon so common it’s now blithely dismissed with the term “starter marriage.” The inescapable lifelong pain of divorce is one of my messages, and so rather than omit or hide a fact that would probably emerge anyway, I just laid it out there at the onset. Also, I think I gain a measure of credibility, having experienced both divorce and long-term marriage.

Telling people not to divorce and declaring that there is no good divorce can make people who have been divorced feel lousy and judged when there’s probably a lot of pain surrounding it already and there may have been good reasons. Why do you do it – knowing the pain yourself?

My book is aimed toward people suffering in a tough marriage who are not divorced, though they may be thinking about it (as well as for their therapists, pastors, friends and families). I discuss the fact that once someone’s divorced, he should and needs to feel that the divorce was necessary. The bromide “When life hands you lemons, make lemonade” applies here—though no divorce is fun, and every divorce brings pain, once it’s done, it’s healthy to move on and even to view that difficult chapter as part of the journey that brings someone to a better, more aware place.

That said, I was still surprised at the anger that arose when a friend of mine suggested that I come speak to her Divorce Recovery Group. Understandably, they were still suffering and struggling to extricate themselves emotionally from their marriages. The group facilitator even wrote me an email with quotes expressing group members’ ire. I should mention that my book includes a whole chapter on justifiable, unavoidable divorce, even suggesting how to leave, in cases of abandonment or where an offending spouse won’t admit or address physical abuse, addiction or personality disorders like full-blown narcissism.

Why is it so important to stop “The Divorce Momentum”?

Once couples start using “the D-word,” escalating emotions kick in, and often they’re sucked into a Divorce Industry (well-meaning therapists, financial and law professionals, coaches, etc.) primed to spiral them down the funnel to a decree. Few couples even realize they’re in that well-worn groove. That’s why it’s useful to name and describe the process and suggest a step backward in order to realign to long-term goals and understand the consequences of immediately responding to rising emotions.

How is everyone who is married at war with the menace of divorce?

Unfortunately, we find ourselves now in a culture with ubiquitous hazards to marriage and few countervailing safeguards for it. We’re offered constant gratification and no incentive to ride out dissatisfaction. I discuss three “divorce magnets” pulling couples apart: 1) The Divorce Industry and “non-judgmental” friends and family who offer sympathy and accommodation to divorcing people, 2) convenient technology that facilitates hook-ups and porn, fomenting “the grass is greener” syndrome, and 3) a competitive, egalitarian workplace that pulls attention to career and away from marriage and offers proximity for fraternization.

Are people not getting married somehow out of the fight? Part of the problem?

“People not getting married” is a strange way to recognize a generation of victims of no-stigma, prolific divorce. I mentioned before the huge numbers of adult children of divorce, who became skittish about commitment, afraid to repeat what they saw their parents endure. They also fear inflicting their own children with the rootless dual identity fostered by shared custody that they suffered. Still, 96% of the population is either presently married or would like to be. It’s nearly everyone’s desire to form a permanent, loving bond with another. Therefore, nobody’s “out of the fight.”

What is it about divorce and the opportunity for men to “have it all” that should get feminists banding together with those talking about its dangers?

A feminist view is that men and women both juggle work and family to “have it all,” and that neither gender can attain it. Because “it all” is a high bar of success in three spheres: career, raising children, and constructive personal and family time.

True, gender roles seem to have stayed largely the same—men in general want to achieve in careers and prefer to entrust their wives with child-related responsibilities. And in general, women want to compete in the work-world and at the same time want and choose close involvement with their children. So, we still see women arranging their lives to address two careers, mother and paying job, and if the husband decides to decamp the marriage, she’s left with the bigger load (plus having to compensate for any slowdown in career momentum because of her child-rearing choices).

So in that sense, it’s more fair, more pro-woman, if spouses honor their marital commitments with the seriousness with which they’d honor a business contract.

I should add, however, that men who are closely involved with their children—like the women who do so—report that the rewards of parenthood exceed the work-related accolades they might have received. So the juggle is worth it.

“Everyone has the potential for joy.” Why did you feel the need to write such a sentence?

Astute you picked up on that. As I wrote Don’t Divorce, I was often saddened thinking back to my clients in unhappy marriages. Sometimes I’d find myself in therapy sessions with sobbing spouses, trying to disguise my own tears of sympathy for what these people were going through—such as years of verbal lashing, lack of affection, or of unheeded pleading to address hurtful habits. Some, women in particular had been completely devastated by a betraying spouse. They couldn’t see their way to ever regaining joy, especially with the person they’d come in some measure to hate. Perhaps people in the depths of marital turmoil and depression should have those words on paper. There’s always hope.

How should married couples and the marriage minded think about happiness and joy?

Very simply: in the long term. My friend Dennis Prager distinguishes between happiness and fun. They’re both wonderful, but you earn happiness through investing time and by exercising your virtues. Happiness comes with setting a goal and accomplishing it, and a fundamental life goal is to pair with another in mutual support and love to create a shared history, especially with the legacy of children. In the last chapter of Don’t Divorce, I describe “The Five Unique Rewards of Marriage.” The final point is that “marriage makes soul mates.” Though many couples claim to be soul mates at their weddings, I hold that only by jointly facing challenges and triumphs over a span of many years can you develop an understanding of the other person on its deepest level, the type of closeness where you can anticipate the other’s reactions and accept that person even when circumstances (or behaviors) might be far from ideal.

“Your marriage is more significant than you realize,” you write. Why is this so important to convey? could it even have an effect on politics?

It’s important to emphasize the significance of marriage because at a vulnerable moment, it’s easier to succumb to the popular “wisdom” of “you deserve to be happy.” Especially in a painful situation, the urgency is to assuage negative emotions, without considering the impact of a split on any future for the marriage, and on children, parents, friends and culture.

As an aside, in Jewish tradition, a newly-married couple doesn’t go off on a honeymoon, but instead spends seven days in their community, each night being feted by a different group of friends and neighbors. The idea is to cement in the couple’s mind that their joy is shared by a large group of people who will be there to support and care for them, in good times like a wedding celebration, and in tough times as well. In other words, it’s to make sure they know that their marriage is significant in building the community and its long-term continuity.

When divorce becomes a trend, it becomes normalized, which encourages others to follow. Though the divorce rate has never topped 30% according to the Census Bureau, the myth of the 50% divorce rate, which you see without attribution everywhere, serves to offer permission for marital break-up. After all, says the departing spouse, we’re just in the wrong half. With divorce accepted, single parenthood became common, and then no big deal, creating a large number of children raised with no husband-and-father role model.

There are policy ramifications to the weakening of marriage. When President Obama wanted to tout his all-encompassing social programs, he invented a character, Julia, who was cared for by government programs, cradle to unwed parenthood to grave. On the conservative side, pro-marriage “family values” continues as an approved buzz-word. Policies will be different if the goal is supporting married families versus supporting individuals. The expectation is that families pull together and rely on each other (often with differentiated roles), so government should enable them to be self-sufficient; unmarried individuals tend to rely more upon the government, and therefore benefit from expansive programs.

Does same-sex marriage complicate things?

I don’t think so. Marriage is a stabilizing force for both individuals and society, and that’s a good thing. I assume partners in same-sex marriages enter them with the same hopes and aspirations, and suffer from the same heartaches and problems as anyone else who bothers to get a wedding license, hold a ceremony and take vows. Among all types of couples, you’ll find a long continuum of attitudes toward and behaviors within marriage. I hope that I can spare spouses and especially children from the disruption and pain of divorce, and thereby inspire them toward honoring commitments and caring for others rather than simply responding to selfish emotions and desires. The more honorable and responsible people in America, the better.

How can a couple struggling make use of this book? If a husband or wife is reading this interview right now, how might they go about approaching their spouse to consider something of your suggestions. Besides buying your book obviously, what’s the first step you’d recommend?

Don’t knock buying the book—sometimes just one partner leaving it on a nightstand inspires communication that’s been long avoided. Keeping hurt and suspicion bottled inside can feed misconceptions and fuel an outburst, so I’d probably say the first step is to approach the other and admit to problems and aspirations. Expressing thoughts in a letter is often the most constructive way to do this, and if the situation is delicate or explosive, the letters might best be exchanged in the presence of a counselor.

Usually at least one person wants to revive the marriage, even if one wants out. The tendency is to accept that if one partner is no longer in love, it’s over—but a partner who wants to save the marriage can’t just nod and accept rejection; she needs to seek out support and push back, even if uncharacteristic or difficult for her.

What’s the most important thing you’ve learned about marriage in all your experience personally and professionally?

Tough to pick just one idea! First off, the notion of “winning by letting go.” Too many marriages get caught in stubbornness. You can stop an escalating argument by saying outright: “Normally I’d respond, but right now I’m going to let go. We can do it your way.” Usually the other person is flummoxed into backing down, too.

Then there’s the idea of “the power of the preface.” If we just preface tough conversations with our internal thought processes, we’re much more likely to get a good reception. For example, “I’ve been thinking about how to tell you this. It’s really difficult for me to say anything that might hurt your feelings because despite it all, I do love you, but…”

I also like the idea of “behaving as if you’re happily married.” That’s a version of the cliché “fake it till you make it,” because if you (even insincerely) behave lovingly, eventually your feelings will fall in line with your actions. This is a Jewish principle, by the way. Anticipate what would please your partner and do it. Maybe you won’t get much reaction until the third, fourth or fifth effort, but pick a time frame (like a week) and don’t let up.

And as far as the tired maxim “don’t go to bed angry,” NO. Go to bed angry; the problem won’t seem nearly as bad in the morning. One of the pieces of advice from The Legacy Project at Cornell University—1,500 stories from long-married elderly—is when you’re having a fight, make a sandwich. It could be that you’re hungry, and even if that’s not the problem, taking a break to break bread stops the conflagration. It’s like taking ten deep breaths but better.

There are plenty more suggestions where those came from. (Buy Don’t Divorce.)

How might we all start thinking differently about marriage and family, in the midst of all the political and cultural and personal challenges?

The reason divorce rates ascended was because of a sea-change in national attitude fomented by spoiled baby-boomers. The Greatest Generation’s motto was “do your duty,” pulling and sacrificing together for the sake of the nation. This morphed into the Disney mantra of “follow your heart,” meaning if today you’re bored or “missing something” or feeling disrespected, you’re entitled to leave. We need to start discussing honoring commitment and ideals broader than those in our personal microcosms.

We should start looking at our marriages not as two people in love, because when that love falters for one person, as surely it will, then the basis of the relationship crumbles. Instead, we should take a long-term view of marriage, understanding it as a “Family Project” in which each person—husband, wife, each child and the extended family and community—plays a valuable role. If we see things in the long-term rather than the feelings-oriented “right now,” we become empowered to weather difficulties, knowing that the larger goal and ultimate outcome is worthwhile.

Probably the most important and inspiring research in Don’t Divorce offers hope for everyone in a troubled marriage, and even for anyone observing our bizarre political scene. Two major studies assessed hundreds of thousands of married couples, asking their levels of marital happiness. Of the spouses who said they were unhappily married, five years later two-thirds in one study, and three-quarters in the other reported being happily wed. And the couples who were most unhappy at first measurement became the most happy five years later. In other words, “this, too shall pass,” and with trust in God and our Constitution—and in the importance and worth of wedding vows—we can surmount and get past our problems and regain equilibrium and confidence in the future.

I was pleased to team with my husband Michael a few days ago for a joint appearance, at Seattle’s Town Hall, moderated by National Review’s Jay Nordlinger and sponsored by the Discovery Institute.

Billed as a wide-ranging exploration centered around each of our new books, we weren’t sure where the moderator’s questions would take us. Michael’s The American Miracle: Divine Providence in the Rise of the Republic includes twelve episodes crucial to the forming of our nation– so bizarre they were immediately hailed as the expression of a Higher Power. My book, on the other hand, reveals the forces pushing even happily married couples toward divorce, dismantles the arguments exiting spouses offer, and empowers spouses to reclaim and revitalize their relationships.

The only part of the program we could control was the five minutes each of us were given to describe our books.

Michael headed off the evening dissecting the only three explanations possible for the mind-boggling events that allowed our nation to form and thrive: 1) that Americans cruelly wrested the country from its inhabitants, and exploited slave labor to claw its way to existence (then why weren’t societies that were even more cut-throat anywhere near as successful?), 2) that luck and coincidence conspired to work in our nation’s favor (but a pattern of happy accidents is still a pattern!) and 3) Someone has a plan and a purpose for which America is, as the founders all agreed, an instrument. The logical conclusion is that we are blessed to be part of such a worthwhile and lofty project.

It’s always tough to follow Michael Medved, whose perfect prose, on radio and especially while mesmerizing a live audience, build to a perfect crescendo.

So I started with a question: “Who here knows somebody who’s been divorced?”

The audience chuckles as everyone raises his hand.

And that’s my point–that divorce is so ubiquitous and has scarred so many that preventing it, and gaining the skills to weather inevitable challenges and assaults to relationships will change the essence of our lives, our communities and our entire culture.

Instead of seeing marriage as the beginning of adulthood, now a generation that suffered through their parents’ divorces feels they’ve got to get their own lives in order–with grad school, job experience and living on their own–before the serious commitment of marriage.

And even then, many young people don’t trust their marriages will endure. I’ve heard wedding vows where the couple pledges to stay “as long as our love shall last.” I’ve heard fiancees confide that while they hope their marriages will be permanent, they’re well aware they “can always get a divorce.” This is the legacy of no-fault divorce and a generation normalizing split-ups. This is a me-first culture (got an iPhone?) that rationalizes putting their own temporal feelings above their children’s futures, mouthing the falsehood “children are resilient.”

The moderator, National Review Senior Editor Jay Nordlinger, asked each of us a handful of questions plucked from assertions in Michael’s and my books, and then the audience let loose with their objections, queries and observations. In all, a lively, uplifting and intellectually challenging occasion.

So–what is the commonality between our nation’s founding and our marriages? It could be that in successful marriages, just as in the ongoing flourishing of our country (despite the peculiarities of current events) God’s Hand is evident. Nearly every couple sees coincidences in their coupling, just as our national leaders could discern times and events where a special force carried them through. It is a sensitivity to this larger plan and the many privileges and blessings we enjoy that enriches our daily experience and allows gratitude to over-ride the difficulties of life.

Our good friend, Discovery Institute founder Bruce Chapman, made us laugh with his introduction

I happen to be married to a somewhat well-known person. After TV stints as CNN’s film critic and 12 years hosting “Sneak Previews” on PBS, for the past 21 years Michael Medved’s been hosting a 3-hour-long nationally syndicated radio show, from a studio at his affiliate station here in Seattle.

He’s incredibly knowledgeable about history and politics, arising each day at 6 to read five newspapers and then drive to his office where he peruses several more. He’s in the midst of writing his 14th book, which is about divine providence in American History, second of two volumes, this one covering from the time of Abraham Lincoln to the present.

Lots of people know all that about him, but few realize he’s a polymath, expert in many, many more subjects, including art and especially classical music.

Step into his den, his writing room, and you’ll not only see a wall of books, but two walls of floor-to ceiling shelves housing thousands upon thousands of classical music CDs. Despite all that, he scours the catalogues of Naxos or Arkiv, companies that must make very little profit specializing in obscure classical recordings. My dear husband’s stealth self-indulgence in the wee hours is to frequent classical music sites and find new releases at bargain prices. The relish with which he announces a fresh discovery equals the delight expressed upon hearing we were to have our first child.

I firmly believe he now treasures that child even more than his CDs, but children can at times bring frustration, and nothing uplifts and delights Michael Medved so consistently as unearthing a most stereophonically excellent classical disc. When phoning home from the office to hear the contents of that day’s mail, he becomes most thrilled learning a coveted CD has arrived, followed by receiving a substantial check.

Today I awoke to find my husband tackling his day, especially bouncy. He was twinkling in a way inconsistent with mornings like this one, socked-in by wet, dreary fog. He made a gleeful announcement:

I certainly remembered that recording, as he has been swooning since it arrived a couple weeks ago. It is indeed a masterpiece, recorded so beautifully you’d swear the orchestra was in your living room, at least if you have a carefully-curated stereo system (as my husband can proudly demonstrate). And Predrag Gosta? Who has ever heard of him? Michael fairly glowed when he dug up that one–a conductor so obscure that Arkiv Music must have sold, oh, two copies of the recording with the London Symphony Orchestra (also featuring Mussorgski’s “Pictures at an Exhibition” with the Rachmaninov; Release Date: 07/29/2016, Label:Edition Lilac,Catalog #: 160530).

My bouncy spouse urged me to immediately look up the review on my smartphone, and I obliged. The review was stunningly effusive yet heartfelt, spilling with superlatives, and I urge you to sup at its table:

Customer Reviews

Average Customer Review: ( 1 Customer Review )

Glorious Demonstration of High Art, Peerless SoundJune 20, 2017

By Michael M.

“It’s hard to know which deserves more praise in this extraordinary release: the deep, detailed, remarkably resonant sound and its peerless demonstration of recording technology, or the passionate, richly romantic conducting that gives new glow to two tired war horses.

I’d never heard of Predrag Gosta prior to this disc and knew nothing of the Edition Lilac label under which it appears. I suspect this may be some specially-funded vanity project to highlight Gosta’s conducting skills and if so it’s a smashing success.

The Rachmaninoff sizzles and sparkles, with every detail exploding with passion and new life. Music that can seem tedious and over-wrought in lesser hands here sounds spontaneous, heart-felt and, where appropriate, subtle and cunning. The powerful brass of the LSO shine with special sheen and double basses have never thrummed with more authoritative impact. The Mussorgsky is also a knock-out- comparable to the justly celebrated classic recordings with the Chicago Symphony and Reiner or Giulini. Altogether, an unexpected triumph. Don’t miss this dazzling gem!“

I was duly impressed, and suggested if he mentioned the recording on his show, Arkiv would receive a surge in sales for that disc.

“Yeah, the number sold will jump from two to four.”

Well, take it from me–you’ll never get a bad recommendation for classical music from Michael Medved. And the more people who gain the enjoyment and spiritual high my husband has received from this music, the happier our world will be.

A June, 2017 television interview with Diane Medved by CBN’s Paul Strand reminds couples that long-term consequences of a split are far worse than addressing the bad feelings of the moment–and those painful feelings will likely improve anyway if you stay put. Below is the accompanying commentary.

It’s Time We Start Shouting “Don’t Divorce!”

06-11-2017

Paul Strand

WASHINGTON—Psychologist Diane Medved has written a book whose title shouts out a command: “Don’t Divorce!”

That’s because most divorces end up doing a lot more damage than people expect and don’t often bring the solutions, peace and comfort they hope for.

She told CBN News one absolutely stunning fact that should give any couple pause: research shows that if troubled spouses will just gut it out and stick together through the tough times, a few years down the road, three-fourths of them reveal their marriages have become happy. Three-Fourths.

From ‘Do Your Duty’ To ‘Do Your Own Thing’

Medved stated there’s been a sea-change that’s led to a divorce culture. America’s gone from the World War Two era “Do Your Duty” generation to “Do Your Own Thing” Baby-Boomer, Generation X and Millennial generations. People have become such consumers, that they believe their happiness and satisfaction with a product – even if that product is a spouse – matters more than anything else.

We also now live in a PC culture where everyone feels its verboten to judge anyone, so few people are willing to tell their friends or loved ones, “Don’t Divorce! You’re going to do a lot of damage to a lot of people.”

Good for the Kids? Don’t Believe It

Medved told CBN News this is especially true of children. They aren’t as resilient as divorcing couples want to believe. Their splitting can cause deep trauma for their children, steal the kids’ innocence and leave them more likely to divorce themselves, or even fear to wed because they feel so unsure their marriage will last.

And nowadays there’s even a whole divorce industry that’s grown up that pushes troubled spouses to give up their marriage because there’s a lot of money to be made when they do split up.

But Medved’s book is filled with many ways husbands and wives can work out their differences, change their attitudes and gain skills to make their marriage thrive.

In fact, the sub-title of “Don’t Divorce” is “Powerful Arguments for Saving and Revitalizing Your Marriage.”

It’s Not a Consumer Product, It’s a Family Project

Medved knows from her own life how to keep a marriage strong as she’s been married for three decades to nationally-syndicated radio talk show host Michael Medved.

The psychologist recommends people look at marriage more as a lifelong “family project” rather than a relationship based on feelings. Feelings will morph and change, but a vow and commitment can be a rock-solid foundation on which to build a lifetime together.

“Why No One Regrets his Divorce” seems a peculiar statement coming from the author of Don’t Divorce. Isn’t the basis of my book that lots of people regret their divorces, and so there’s good reason to prevent it?

Divorce Recovery Group members making lemonade

However, I’ve learned that already-divorced people–especially those for whom the experience is still fresh and painful–react strongly even to the two simple words on my book jacket.

Within a single Divorce Recovery Group, some get defensive: “You can’t tell me what to do. You have no idea what I’ve been going through.”

Some get angry: “How dare you foist your values on me!”

Some get irritated, motivated by guilt: “I had an opportunity, and I took it, because that was what I needed right then.”

And others are more sanguine: “Maybe I could have made my marriage work, but if I’d stayed, I never would have gotten to the point where I am now.”

Even people whose spouses dumped them, who suffer years of disorientation and emotional agony, tend to look back and know that their ordeal was required because of deep flaws of their partner, perhaps abetted by themselves.

Here’s the punchline: After the fact, hardly anyoneregrets his divorce because psychologically healthy people take lemons and make lemonade. They look at the psychological growth they’ve experienced, and realize that the path to that growth may have been grueling, but the outcome is a higher awareness, a better place.

The big “however,” though, is that going through the divorce, and in most cases, the prelude to the divorce, was horrible. It is to minimize the miserable prelude and eliminate destructive and demoralizing divorce–for the partners and a host of friends and family, and most of all the children–that I wrote Don’t Divorce.

Don’t Divorce is for married people who might need a boost through a rough patch so they can repair problems and keep going.

One of the most encouraging parts of my book describes research on spouses who rate themselves as “unhappily married.” When surveyed again five years later, two-thirds in one study, and three-fourths in another, say they’re “happily” or “very happily” married. In other words, if couples just have the strength to resist the pro-divorce pressures around them, and affirm their commitment, they’re likely to rebound and find satisfaction in their marriages once again.

Couples in the midst of strife or stress also need to know what they’re in for if they do break up, because that can also motivate them to rebuild the relationship in which they already have a huge investment.

I’d be worried about already-divorced people who wallowed in the woe of divorce for extended periods of time. Certainly if abuse, addiction or abandonment occur, a divorce may be appropriate and inevitable–and even then usually brings sorrow and mourning. But then there’s healing, and an important part of that is to view the path to your present state as worthwhile, because it’s from this new vantage that you can envision a brighter, more aware future.

Recently I gave a talk in Los Angeles, and an attendee approached me afterward. “You may not remember me,” he noted after introducing himself. “I was your client for marital counseling about 20 years ago. I think about you often,” he said, “because though my ex and I did get a divorce, it was you who taught me how to be a better husband, and I’ve been applying it with my current wife for 18 happy years.” He was grateful because though it had been too late to salvage his first marriage, he turned a difficult episode into a pathway to development.

My message to married couples is that you don’t have to suffer a divorce to find happiness. Instead of applying energy to dismantling your marriage, put the same amount of effort into fixing your divisions. The results will mean the world to your children, and can make your world one with far less to regret.

Childhood is precious and worth guarding. (This was me and my brother in our backyard.)

She shares my observation that children are not naturally resilient, despite the oft-repeated assertion, and she describes ways she encourages that skill in her 7-year-old daughter and 10-year-old son since the sudden death of her husband two years ago.

You see evidence of kids laid low by painful circumstances all the time. Sophie, aged 4, reverted to diapers when her parents split up. Jason, 7, refused to go to school, clinging to his mom, when his dad left for a tour of military service. Twins James and Mark, 9, increased their brotherly conflicts when their mom took a full-time tech job. Such negative reactions to major changes are so common among children, we expect them. Yet even as we tend to these sad responses, we continue to say off-handedly, “kids re resilient.”

In my book Don’t Divorce: Powerful Arguments for Saving and Revitalizing Your Marriage, I note that resilience means bouncing back to a former shape, and yet after a big blow—like parents’ divorce, but it could be any crushing event—children are ill-equipped to regain their previous equilibrium.

Children aren’t born with social skills—they’re simply primed to survive. They’ll do what they must in order to handle setbacks, but how they do that is not an innate resilience—it’s the flailing of a drowning man. The childhood task is to understand the world, and through experience and inculcation, learn the skills to navigate it. When a frightening event happens, kids can’t just summon some store of “resilience” that’s poised, ready for use.

You may have heard the bromide, “What doesn’t kill me makes me stronger.” Yes, enduring family upheaval may, after the trauma, cause some children to emerge stronger (and others may withdraw, or become fearful). But what caring parent would subject her child to the part that nearly “kills” him on the prospect that the child might be fortified for a subsequent ordeal?

Some events, like the death of a parent, aren’t a matter of choice. But most major shifts children endure might be mitigated or avoided if parents placed highest priority on family stability. After a trauma, a youngster can never recapture his former state of childhood innocence—he becomes hardened and cautious lest he suffer again.

In Saving Childhood: Protecting Our Children from the National Assault on Innocence, my husband and I write about the fragility of a joyful childhood, and the diligence with which parents must guard it. Our publisher chose to put this excerpt about an interchange with our then-young daughter on the back of the book jacket:

Last year on Shayna’s eighth birthday, our guests serenaded her over the cake, and our delighted daughter beamed. Toward the end of the day, she came over to Michael to cuddle. “I want to say goodbye,” she said sweetly and solemnly.

Assuming a child can absorb a hardship without permanent impact ignores that children are building their outlooks with every experience, every day.

Dr. Anthony Scioli, author of Hope in the Age of Anxiety, says building resilience relies on hope, a sense of mastery and attachments. When kids face situations like parental loss or divorce, relocation, or a major jolt from family routines, they lose attachments (or opportunities for them) and lack the control over the situation to feel mastery. In the face of events they find hurtful or confusing, their hope is shattered.

In other words, family disruptions prevent children from becoming resilient, and undermine what limited resilience they may have picked up.

What can loving parents do? First off, when making family decisions, remember that the most beneficial climate for your children’s development offers security, consistency and optimism. One of the points I make in Don’t Divorce is that staying in a low-conflict marriage (and two-thirds of divorces occur in low-conflict homes) “for the sake of the children” is a noble, laudable choice. That’s not to say that spouses should keep suffering, but that maintaining a stable home for the children you love can be a worthwhile motivator to address problems rather than call it quits.

Reassuringly, in studies of couples who deem themselves unhappily married, three-fourths of those who stick it out report five years later that their marriages are happy or very happy. Viewing your present differences as a “rough patch” or finite problem to solve can remind you of the long-term significance of your marriage.

In making other choices—moving to a new home, taking on more work—consider how brief and precious these years of childhood are. What household upgrades or amount of added income is worth the impact your decision will have for your children, and the loss of time you’ll have to enjoy and influence their upbringing?

And when circumstances force major adjustments on children, don’t assume they can just sail through. Instead, minimize the amounts and types of changes they’ll face, and keep constant any grounding influences you can.

For example, maintain the child’s surroundings—the familiar room, the usual routines and the caring adults who form his world. Talk to your children about the changes around them, and suggest ways they can see at least some differences in a positive light, while acknowledging the downsides and resultant feelings. Put yourself in your child’s shoes, and share how you imagine you’d feel if confronted with the adjustments your child must make.

The good news is that children can learn how to handle adversity. “Positive Psychology” guru Dr. Martin Seligman runs a program at the University of Pennsylvania that teaches resiliency, which is one of several coping skills necessary for well-being. Other school-based programs focus on adapting to change and awareness of emotions. But such courses exist because children aren’t naturally capable of rebounding after a blow.

Sheryl Sandberg describes the ways she fosters her children’s expression of feelings, and maintains the memory of her husband. With experience, time and practice, assisted by caring adults, children can become better at processing and responding to hardships thrust upon them. But when you hear someone justify a major family shift with “the kids will be okay—children are resilient,” do those youngsters a favor and find out more.

The excellent review reprinted below by Dr. Hilary Towers from the Catholic publication Mercatornet calls Don’t Divorce“a welcome respite from the anthology of divorce apologetics lining the shelves of most public libraries (and many offices of marriage therapists) in America today.”

Her one area of disagreement regards her Catholic faith. She discusses the Catholic view that marriage is a permanent state that is not subject to divorce, even in the extreme cases I detail in my chapter “When Divorce is Necessary: How to Know When to Quit:”

“Roman Catholics remain married in the wake of civil divorce. Divorce and physical separation may be necessary in order to secure legal entitlements or ensure physical safety. But none of this means the marriage is over, or ‘failed.’ Or that the time has come to ‘give up.”’

In this I must respectfully differ with Dr. Towers on theological grounds (I’m an observant Jew), and based simply on practical reality. When the partners have a legal divorce and cease all connection, Catholic doctrine holds the marriage has not ended or failed, while Protestants, Jews and most other religions accept that in some (ideally very rare) cases, divorce occurs. Read on for Dr. Towers’ support for the Catholic view.

Don’t Divorce: A clinician’s no-nonsense view of marital abandonment.

Ruth was married to Joel. Sylvia was married to Christopher. The two couples were the best of friends until Sylvia and Joel had an affair. Soon after Ruth discovered the betrayal of her husband of 15 years, Joel

“took his suitcases to his parents’ house. Still living on the property where he grew up, they had a separate-entrance guesthouse that Joel took over…Joel lived in his folks’ guest house rent-free for three years.

“Seven years after the two divorces, Sylvia and Joel finally did get married.”

Quite understandably, Ruth suffered from “deep depression” while “Christopher carried a hatred for both his ex-wife and former friend.”

But although Joel’s parents “were shocked by their son’s disgraceful behavior” they “felt an obligation to support him.”

A clinical psychologist who has worked with troubled marriages for over two decades, Medved takes a no-nonsense, clear-eyed approach to the “divorce momentum” (her phrase) that characterizes our age. Her book is a welcome respite from the anthology of divorce apologetics lining the shelves of most public libraries (and many offices of marriage therapists) in America today.

The work is also unusual in that it is not primarily a broader philosophical, religious, or data-driven case against divorce (although it includes elements of each). Instead, Medved speaks in her capacity as a clinician to two subsets of people in non-abusive marriages: those who are seriously contemplating divorce but who remain open to the idea of putting it off, and those whose spouses are threatening divorce.

“If you’re determined to leave…you may behave civilly, but you have erected a cruel barrier to the pain and hurt of the one left behind. The spouse executing a ‘chop and run’ divorce has severed the emotional connection that once bound the family. If that’s you…I’ve spent much of my career helping the one you’ve emotionally abandoned.”

Medved’s attempt to reach spouses who would “chop and run,” is a worthy effort and much-needed resource not only for spouses themselves but for advocates who have their true well-being in mind.

Families, friends, clergy, and therapists can exhibit authentic care by holding accountable a son or daughter, a parent, a best friend, a sibling, or a client who has gone astray. To do so means resisting the urge to look away from, or justify, the narcissistic behavior at the core of so many divorces today.

The book is chock-full of reasons to avoid what one researcher calls the “bystander response” to divorce:

“Relatives and friends who don’t want to get involved in your marriage may just step back and do nothing instead of intervening. Siblings, friends, and families of a divorcing couple offer the excuse that a marriage is private.”

In a culture where steps taken to ensure fidelity in one’s own marriage may be considered “sexist,” the task for those who wish to rehabilitate lifelong, monogamous marriage may seem a steep uphill climb – and it surely is.

But one concrete step each of us can take is to reach out to errant spouses in our own lives, in a spirit of true charity to every person involved. We can help him or her embrace the difficult but urgent (and entirely possible) task of repentance, marital reconciliation, and family renewal.

To employ a Catholic buzzword: we can accompany our friend back to the truth of his or her vocation.

Alas, as Medved correctly observes in a section on the high likelihood of peer pressure to leave a spouse for any reason at all (often exerted through Facebook and other social media): “In a culture that overwhelmingly accepts divorce, you’ll have to seek out advocates for the tough job of rebuilding…Beware well-meaning friends!”

The chapter entitled, “The Ruinous Ripples of Divorce,” in particular, is a must-read for anyone still unconvinced of the profound influence of one’s social support network on the decision to keep or break a marriage vow.

From my own perspective as a developmental psychologist who studies marital abandonment, especially as treated within the Catholic Church, Don’t Divorce is limited in one key respect that should give Catholic readers (especially clergy and parish ministry leaders) – and others who hold the marriage bond as binding – pause.

The main issue is the theological and ontological “lens” through which the matter of divorce – and perhaps more importantly the nature of marriage itself – is viewed. Medved’s perspective, that of an observant Jew, is similar to that of many Protestant denominations. Marriage is a sacred covenant ordained and sustained by God, which can be legitimately broken for good reason. In other words, although permanence is to be desired and sought after, marriages can and do “fail,” and sometimes should “end.”

In a chapter called, “When It’s Time to Give Up,” Medved lists at least five scenarios in which “life with another becomes so depressing and punishing that after years of wear and disintegration, the marriage has to end.” These include one spouse’s unwillingness to change, to respond to communication, or to seek therapy. Interestingly, the “chop and run” abandonment scenario which appears so prominently throughout her book is also included.

The problem, of course, is that this list alone represents the reasons for so many divorces today. American civil divorce (as Medved highlights time and again) does not require the consent of both spouses. One spouse can shatter the other’s 20 years of emotional, psychological, spiritual, and financial investment in marriage and family life in a matter of weeks.

So, what to do? If the answer remains divorce in these scenarios, it seems to me we haven’t made much progress in our goal of reversing the divorce momentum. Somewhere, sometime, even victims of infidelity, abuse, emotional abandonment and unilateral divorce must refuse the culture’s call to “move on,” stand firm in their stations, and keep their wedding bands on.

Here is the real dilemma from my vantage point, the significance of which is currently being played out for all the world to see in Catholic and non-Catholic media alike. Roman Catholics remain married in the wake of civil divorce. Divorce and physical separation may be necessary in order to secure legal entitlements or ensure physical safety. But none of this means the marriage is over, or “failed.” Or that the time has come to “give up.”

This sacramental reality, which flows directly from the Church’s understanding of marriage as a reflection of our relationship to God Himself (Who never quits on us, or pronounces our relationship with Him failed) is not an arbitrary rule designed to lock the married faithful into a life of misery.

Among other earthly and spiritual benefits, the theological view of marriage as permanent is the surest safeguard available to maintain our own sexual integrity in the midst of carrying a very heavy cross. The temptation to “move on” in the midst of marital strife before and after divorce is strong and unfortunately (as described above) encouraged by many peers who are misguided in their efforts to help.

Perhaps most importantly, spousal fidelity during times of marital crisis also serves to protect the children involved – not only from the physical and psychological risks associated with moving on to new partners, but the risk of future divorce itself.

None of this stands as a criticism of Dr. Medved, who herself spends much time refuting the fantasy of divorce and remarriage as a “fresh start.” It is rather an opportunity for Catholics, and others who may share the Catholic view of marriage, to reflect with pride and hope on the Church’s steadfast teachings. For the Church’s position on lifelong marriage is one of hope precisely because it leaves open the possibility of marital reconciliation.

Early on in Don’t Divorce, Medved describes with some fascination a rare breed who actually believe in the indissolubility of the marriage bond:

“Did you ever meet someone who holds that marriage lasts until death, no matter what? Someone who would stay married even in unsatisfactory circumstances? There are such people, and there used to be a lot more of them.”

Indeed, they are called Catholics. And with some encouragement to rediscover and embrace their Church’s ancient wisdom on this matter, we may see their numbers rise again in years to come.

Dr. Hilary Towers is a developmental psychologist and mother of five children. Her work in behavioral genetics appears in a variety of academic journals and books. She writes for many popular publications and speaks frequently on the subjects of marriage and spousal abandonment, especially as those issues are treated within the Catholic Church.

My husband Michael and I have been married for 32 years, which seems impossible because I don’t feel I’m 32 years old yet.

But when your baby gets married and then does something astounding, like have a child of his own, it’s tough to deny you’ve got some years behind you.

I’m in the midst of promoting my new book, Don’t Divorce: Powerful Arguments for Saving and Revitalizing Your Marriage, and often hosts of the several radio interviews I’m doing daily will ask why people should stick it out through tough times.

Part of my answer is…Julia Rose. That’s the name of my new…tough to say it…granddaughter. Now, you can say that plenty of divorced people have grandchildren, and I’m sure they’re as tickled as I am with their sweet little offspring. But nobody can share the joy of this new little person better than the partner whose commitment and constancy brought you to this point together.

Together, couples who have lasted a generation share a special bond, because they continue to form the basis and model for their child’s parenting–which is the parenting they accomplished together, whether imperfectly or not. The mere fact that they–we–now look at each other incredulously, realizing we were instrumental in the existence of a new family, is a reward directly derived from our tenacity.

We made it this far as a team, and that is gratifying in a way that validates and confirms the joys and difficulties we’ve experienced.

When couples are angry, disgusted, bored and betrayed, they look at the “greener grass” as enticing, with two erroneous assumptions: that they’ll find a much better romantic partner, and that the problems they’re now mired in will be over if they just end the marriage.

Well, my divorced psychology clients told me that you have to kiss a lot of frogs to find…another bunch of frogs. When you come to a second marriage, you’re carrying with you all the “baggage” that makes joining with you complex–relationships with children, financial complications, professional expectations–and then you have to agreeably mesh all that with the same or more baggage lugged by a potential partner. Not so easy, especially because older and “wiser” divorcees tend to be pickier about who they choose. They don’t want to blithely slip into another flawed relationship.

As far as solving the problems plaguing the marriage, perhaps some bugaboos will be removed–usually replaced with a raft of new problems if children are involved. You can never divorce the other parent of your children, who you might have to see several times a week if you share custody. And if your kids are grown, you’ll always have those awkward family occasions where the kids will have to choose between you. Christmas at Mom’s and Thanksgiving at Dad’s? Both of you walking your bride down the aisle? And the complications with blended families radiate out from there.

When the blessed event of a grandchild happens, rather than sharing those moments with her together, you’ll take turns (if things are amicable). Or perhaps one or the other grandparent will end up more of a ghost figure, removed from the scene.

After staying together 32 years, my husband and I have a lot of happy memories (most captured by my incessant photo-taking) and a few tough times and trials. But that’s brought us an unshakeable bond and a deep satisfaction that can only be created via endurance and time. That’s how you fashion a soul-mate, which research shows is the number one desire Millenials have for their marriages.

A traditional Jewish blessing for a new couple is that they live to see and enjoy their grandchildren. That’s wonderful in itself, but the blessing is in enjoying them together.